quote:
2. I don't see that as a problem at all. The problem is yours in that my model is going to extend straight continuously and remain straight, nothing; not even curvature of space curving it. Imo, your problem, in the real universe is that my Euclidean model falsifies your GR model unless alleged curvature of space can physically bend my bar to follow the alleged curvature of space.
And here you are being thoroughly illogical.
Assuming you (confusingly) mean your hypotthetical iron bar as your "model" it has to follow the curvature of space unless you assume that it has "magical" properties which let it behave differently from any known object, and break out of our three dimensional space. But if you make that then it becomes irrelevant.
To sumn up your argument.
1) If the universe were curved (and closed) a sufficiently long straight (in our three dimensions) iron bar would meet up with itself.
2) A magically straight iron bar would not do so
3) Therefore the universe cannot be curved (and closed).
It just doesn't work because 1) relies on the iron bar being ordinary and following the curvature of space and 2) assumes that the iron bar is not ordinary and does not follow the curvature of space.
Logically speaking your argument is worthless.
I have raised these points more than once, and I'm not the only one to do so. Yet still you cling to the idea that it "refutes" the curvature of space. Even though you cannot defend it - as has been seen in this thread.